HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2013, 8:37 PM
ivanwolf's Avatar
ivanwolf ivanwolf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 446
Ok here is a crude example:

I used the same colors as in the examples above. So the new Red building is taller and touches or comes close to the existing Bridges section near Lamar. Exact meeting of corners is not known but likely very close as you would think the size of apartments/condos is similar. You can see my try at the height differences of Bridges and the new red structure where they meet.

I was thinking U shape but its clearly L shape which is better I think for the existing Bridges owners as it gives them a better angle to the river view rather than a flat 90 degree building face next to their balconies such would have been the case if U shaped.

I outlined the Paggi House area which seems like it will change their parking area, maybe they must keep some surface parking. As they would loose the parking up to Riverside but gain some NorthWest into the current structure of the Taco Cabana based on this guess. I illustrated that area with the dark red.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Mar 18, 2013, 8:56 PM
lzppjb's Avatar
lzppjb lzppjb is online now
7th Gen Central Texan
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Austin TX
Posts: 2,363
Great job on the visual.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2013, 12:14 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is online now
400 feet tall
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanwolf View Post
Ok here is a crude example:

I used the same colors as in the examples above. So the new Red building is taller and touches or comes close to the existing Bridges section near Lamar. Exact meeting of corners is not known but likely very close as you would think the size of apartments/condos is similar. You can see my try at the height differences of Bridges and the new red structure where they meet.

I was thinking U shape but its clearly L shape which is better I think for the existing Bridges owners as it gives them a better angle to the river view rather than a flat 90 degree building face next to their balconies such would have been the case if U shaped.

I outlined the Paggi House area which seems like it will change their parking area, maybe they must keep some surface parking. As they would loose the parking up to Riverside but gain some NorthWest into the current structure of the Taco Cabana based on this guess. I illustrated that area with the dark red.

That's exactly how I think it'll look.
__________________
it's just a jump to the left and then a step to the right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Mar 19, 2013, 5:52 AM
austlar1 austlar1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
That's exactly how I think it'll look.
I drove by there yesterday to take a closer look. I think you (Kevin) probably nailed the actual footprint of the proposed building. There is no way it is going to do much harm to views or light in the existing building. Some of the east facing units will lose a bit of river view (they have to go out on their balconies and turn to the left to get that view now), but I think all the higher units are going to continue to be able to see downtown, and all east facing units will have plenty of eastern light. The lower units currently have a rooftop view of the Piaggi House complex and parking lot. They will continue to have that view. The units wedged in the elbow of the existing building seem to have a parially obstructed northern view. The new building will be well over 100 feet away from their windows. They are the losers it would appear, but did they ever have any reason to believe that nothing would be built to block their partial view of the river. Even a five story building would block the view. I don't know how many units might actually be in the "elbow" of the existing building. Certainly not enough to merit blocking construction of a substantial project like the one proposed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted May 23, 2013, 4:50 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is online now
400 feet tall
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,958
City Council will vote on it tomorrow.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/l...ot-plan/nXzfP/
Quote:
Posted: 7:55 p.m. Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Affordable housing, height at issue in 96-foot planned high-rise near Lady Bird Lake

By Sarah Coppola
American-Statesman Staff

A 96-foot residential tower planned near Lady Bird Lake is drawing opposition from nearby condo dwellers and is the source of a dispute among Austin city officials about affordable housing.

The project, called 211 South Lamar, heads to City Council for a vote Thursday. The nine-story building would include ground-level retail and 175 luxury apartments or condos. It would sit on a high-profile, one-acre site at West Riverside Drive and South Lamar Boulevard where a Taco Cabana restaurant currently sits.
__________________
it's just a jump to the left and then a step to the right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted May 23, 2013, 3:33 PM
AustinSky AustinSky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
City Council will vote on it tomorrow.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/l...ot-plan/nXzfP/
The $1.2 million that City of Austin Housing Director Betsy Spencer is asking for is way to much. Thats quite a big difference in what the Planning Department thinks the delopers should owe ($44,000); which is a bit low in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted May 23, 2013, 5:04 PM
MightyYoda MightyYoda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSky View Post
The $1.2 million that City of Austin Housing Director Betsy Spencer is asking for is way to much. Thats quite a big difference in what the Planning Department thinks the delopers should owe ($44,000); which is a bit low in my opinion.
It very much feels like some of the council members are buying into the city's own hype. We start trying to take every developer for a ride like this and development is going to stop and prices will go up for everyone due to pent up demand. 44k is low, but 1.2 million is silly. It's the equivalent of people making wild claims in posts on the internet, it undermines any legitimate arguments you may have.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted May 23, 2013, 6:15 PM
AustinSky AustinSky is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by MightyYoda View Post
It very much feels like some of the council members are buying into the city's own hype. We start trying to take every developer for a ride like this and development is going to stop and prices will go up for everyone due to pent up demand. 44k is low, but 1.2 million is silly. It's the equivalent of people making wild claims in posts on the internet, it undermines any legitimate arguments you may have.
Couldn't Agree more. If the city lets such entities such as the Citys department of Housing throw out such "silly" numbers developers are sure going to take a second thoughts about developing here.

I consider myself a liberal individual and am very sympathetic to the affordable housing effort. But this defies all logic. If you place such high fees on the developers they'll just pack up and go somewhere else; thus leaving those depending on affordable housing empty handed. This totally just defies all basic economic sense.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted May 23, 2013, 6:24 PM
Syndic's Avatar
Syndic Syndic is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 1,115
The program works if the numbers aren't too onerous. We just need to make sure that the numbers are reasonable.
__________________
Anti-palm trees. Death to I-35!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted May 23, 2013, 11:24 PM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,121
Here's a link to the documents for that project.

http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=189243

The Downtown Density bonus plan has a fee-in-lieu amount of $10 per sf. For this particular project, the fee-in-lieu payment is 60% of the normal fee amount - ($6 per sf) I don't know if that's because the project is a PUD or if it's because the project is technically outside the downtown area.

Jump down to page 14 and you'll see how the two city departments and the developers calculated the payment.

The total square footage of the project is 203,207 sf. The bonused area above and beyond what would normally be allowed at that site is 73,154 sf.

Quote:
PDRD staff's calculated fee is based on 10% of the bonused square footage.
(1) 73,154 x 10% = 7,315 x $6 = $43,890 fee-in-lieu.

(2) The developer's proposed fee is based on the overall bonused square footage.
73,154 x $6 = $438,924 fee-in-lieu.

(3) NHCD's recommended fee-in-lieu is based on the total square footage within the PUD.
203,207 x $6 = $1,219,242 fee-in-lieu.
I think what the developer is proposing is fair and reasonable., and it should be how all other projects are calculated. They should only have to pay for the overall bonused square footage rather than the total square footage.

What's weird is that there was an Austin Business Journal article earlier that included a spreadsheet released by the City of Austin for other projects in the CBD, and they were calculating the fee-in-lieu payment for all those projects the same way as the developer is in this particular case.

The spreadsheet showed the bonused area in the third column from the right (not the total square footage in the projects) and multiplied that by $10 to get the payment amount.

It would help if the right hand knew what the left hand was doing at the City of Austin.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted May 24, 2013, 9:20 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is online now
400 feet tall
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,958
Quote:
Originally Posted by LoneStarMike View Post
Here's a link to the documents for that project.

http://www.austintexas.gov/edims/document.cfm?id=189243
Renderings from that link:

View from northeast


View from west


View from north


View from north


View from northwest


View from southeast


View from north along Barton Springs


__________________
it's just a jump to the left and then a step to the right.

Last edited by KevinFromTexas; Aug 10, 2013 at 5:44 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted May 25, 2013, 7:33 AM
Komeht Komeht is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 294
What a great looking project and what a wonderful way to frame the park. It is beautifully scaled and will be a nice gateway to south Austin. City needs to get on board with this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted May 25, 2013, 9:15 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is online now
400 feet tall
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,958
^Agreed, and that 2nd to last rendering shows how little this will encroach on the views/light of Bridges on the Park. I think it's very respectful of that neighboring building. The only wall of Bridges on the Park that would be blocked is the hallway in the building. The row of windows on that wall are at the end of the hall near the elevator bank.
__________________
it's just a jump to the left and then a step to the right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jun 27, 2013, 10:57 PM
LoneStarMike's Avatar
LoneStarMike LoneStarMike is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Austin
Posts: 2,121
From the Austin Chronicle:

Taco Tower Project on Council's Plate
The Taco PUD wins divided blessing of Planning Commission
By Elizabeth Pagano, Fri., June 21, 2013


Quote:
Though the opposition was out in force at last week's Planning Commission meeting, commissioners nevertheless voted 5-3 to recommend a zoning change that would allow developers Post Paggi to increase the height of its planned condo project to 96-feet. Several commissioners took the time to argue that the added density at Riverside and Lamar was not only a good fit – it was exactly what the city needs, with an increase in population interested in living Downtown and a limited amount of space for people to live.

[SNIP]

Developers note that, in exchange for the benefit of added height from the zoning change, they are offering a selection of community benefits that include saving trees, providing retail and restaurants on the ground floor, water quality controls, a public plaza, and space for a bike share program. Developers will also be required to provide a certain amount of affordable housing, or pay a $430,000 fee in lieu to the city's affordable housing fund, though that determination will ultimately be up to Council.
According to the Austin American Statesman, City Council postponed until Aug. 8 a vote on the zoning for a 96-foot mixed-use project at 211 S. Lamar Blvd.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2013, 4:57 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is online now
400 feet tall
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,958
http://www.statesman.com/news/news/l...-96-foo/nZJnw/
Quote:
Posted: 9:52 p.m. Thursday, Aug. 8, 2013
Austin City Council gives initial OK for 96-foot building near Lady Bird Lake

By Sarah Coppola
American-Statesman Staff

The Austin City Council gave preliminary approval late Thursday to a 96-foot mixed-use project planned for a high-profile site near Lady Bird Lake.

The project — a nine-story building with ground-level retail and 175 luxury apartments or condos — would be built on one acre at West Riverside Drive and South Lamar Boulevard, where a Taco Cabana restaurant now sits.
__________________
it's just a jump to the left and then a step to the right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2013, 4:18 PM
MightyYoda MightyYoda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinFromTexas View Post
Sometimes I don't know why I am so tempted to read comments on AAS website, but I guess it is similar to watching a train wreck and not being able to turn away.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2013, 4:33 PM
The ATX's Avatar
The ATX The ATX is offline
Right here, right now
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Suburban Low-rise
Posts: 5,119
Quote:
Originally Posted by MightyYoda View Post
Sometimes I don't know why I am so tempted to read comments on AAS website, but I guess it is similar to watching a train wreck and not being able to turn away.
One thing I noticed since I started subscribing to the Statesman is that the quality of the comments on the expensive side of the pay wall are more thoughtful and much less trolling. Articles have a different set of comments on each side of the pay wall. It's a case of you get what you pay for.
__________________
Austin on Urban Planet:
http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/forum/215-austin/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2013, 6:19 PM
MightyYoda MightyYoda is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hill Country View Post
One thing I noticed since I started subscribing to the Statesman is that the quality of the comments on the expensive side of the pay wall are more thoughtful and much less trolling. Articles have a different set of comments on each side of the pay wall. It's a case of you get what you pay for.
That is good to know.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Aug 9, 2013, 11:00 PM
bigdogc's Avatar
bigdogc bigdogc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hill Country View Post
One thing I noticed since I started subscribing to the Statesman is that the quality of the comments on the expensive side of the pay wall are more thoughtful and much less trolling. Articles have a different set of comments on each side of the pay wall. It's a case of you get what you pay for.
first legitimate point to paying for the subscription.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Aug 10, 2013, 5:47 AM
KevinFromTexas's Avatar
KevinFromTexas KevinFromTexas is online now
400 feet tall
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: sunshine and taco trucks on every corner
Posts: 43,958
New rendering showing the street level retail along Riverside.

http://www.bizjournals.com/austin/bl...d-9-story.html

__________________
it's just a jump to the left and then a step to the right.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > United States > Texas & Southcentral > Austin
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:40 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.